Miami-Dade County Board of County Commissioners Office …Apr 16, 2013 · Concourse E Satellite is being serviced by a single three‐car Automated People Mover of questionable reliability

Miami-Dade County Board of County Commissioners

Office of the Commission Auditor

Charles Anderson, CPA Commission Auditor

111 NW First Street, Suite 1030 Miami, Florida 33128

305-375-4354

Board of County Commissioners Meeting

April 16, 2013 9:30 A.M.

Commission Chamber

Research Division

Board of County Commissioners April 16, 2013 Meeting

Research Notes

1

Item No. Research Notes

3B1 130543

RESOLUTION RELATING TO MIAMI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT; RATIFYING ACTION OF MAYOR OR MAYOR’S DESIGNEE IN APPROVING AND EXECUTING, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 2‐285(6) OF THE CODE OF MIAMI‐DADE COUNTY, A JOINT PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION UNDER FINANCIAL PROJECT NUMBER 42931519401 FOR A GRANT IN THE AMOUNT OF $6,980,495.00 TO OFFSET THE COST OF THE REPLACEMENT OF THE AUTOMATED PEOPLE MOVER FOR THE CONCOURSE E SATELLITE FACILITY(Aviation Department)

Notes The proposed resolution ratifies the actions of the Mayor or Mayor’s designee, pursuant to provisions of the Miami‐Dade Aviation Department (MDAD) Expedite Ordinance No. 95‐64, codified as Section 2‐285 (6) of the Code of Miami‐Dade County, in accepting and executing, on March 8, 2013, a Joint Participation Agreement 42931519401 (JPA) with the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) for FDOT funding of $6,980,495.00 toward the Concourse E Satellite Automated People Mover at Miami International Airport (MIA).The JPA expires on June 30, 2015. This JPA provides FDOT funding of $6,980,495.00 toward the total project cost of $45,813,486.00. An additional $15,926,000.00 is allocated under FDOT’s Five‐Year Work Program for Fiscal Years 2013‐2014. MDAD’s Capital Improvement Program will fund any costs that exceed funds received from FDOT, which currently total $22,906,991.00. Project Description Design, purchase, install and commission the automatic people mover to transport passengers from the main terminal to Concourse E Satellite.

BACKGROUND The Concourse E Satellite is connected to the MIA Main Terminal via a two‐track/three‐car Automated People Mover system. Constructed in the early 1970s, the system is well beyond its operational life‐cycle. Further, an accident in 2008 put the south lane out of service, so the Concourse E Satellite is being serviced by a single three‐car Automated People Mover of questionable reliability with no spare equipment available for repairs. Bus service for passenger conveyance is the only alternative should the current single track system fail. MDAD has identified an immediate need to replace the existing Automated People Mover in order to maintain continuous and dependable access to the Concourse E Satellite international gates. The scope of work consists of the design, purchase, installation and commissioning of a new

two‐track Automated People Mover system to transport passengers from the MIA Main Terminal to the Concourse E Satellite. On December 18, 2012, the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) through R‐1070‐12, approved a settlement agreement between

Miami‐Dade County and the insurance carriers that provide property insurance for County facilities. The settlement resolved all claims among the parties relating to the November 28, 2008 crash of the South E‐Satellite Automated People Mover train at MIA, with the carriers agreeing to pay $8 million to the County.

Additional Information On December 4, 2012 the BCC through R‐1002‐12, rejected all bids for Satellite E Automated People Mover Replacement and O&M Services, ITB No. MDAD‐05‐10 and authorize the advertisement of a new solicitation. Pursuant to Resolution No. 1002‐12, the Miami‐Dade Aviation Department (MDAD) has been researching APM replacement alternatives for a reliable and cost‐effective passenger connection between Satellite E and the Terminal. On November 17, 2010, MDAD issued an Invitation to Bid (ITB) (MDAD 05‐10), seeking a contractor to furnish, install, operate and maintain an in‐kind APM system to replace the existing one. The general scope of work was divided into phases: Phase I included the replacement of the existing dual‐lane shuttle and Phase II included the operation and maintenance of the system for five years with options for MDAD to extend the contract for two additional five‐year periods.

Two proposals were received: one from Mitsubishi Heavy Industries America, Inc. (Mitsubishi) for $61,993,159, and one from Bombardier Transportation USA (Bombardier) for $64,992,621. The Phase II O&M bids for 15 years were $40,618,833 from Mitsubishi and $53,610,669 from Bombardier.

Due to MDAD’s budgetary constraints at that time, neither of the bids was deemed acceptable and could not be recommended for award. In an attempt to find a more cost effective alternative, MDAD in August 2011 issued an ITB via its Miscellaneous Construction Contract (MCC) for a contractor to modify and refurbish three Metromover vehicles from MDT scheduled to be removed from passenger service in September 2011. The vehicles were to be modified to match the existing configuration of the Satellite E APM System so that once refurbished they could be permanently coupled and utilized on the South Lane of the Satellite E APM System. Additionally, MDAD reserved its right to request within 12 months that the contractor refurbish three additional Metromover vehicles at the same bid price.

Three proposals were received from Otis Elevator ($3,533,526), Schwager‐Davis ($4,235,387) and Bombardier ($8,815,237). However, after a thorough review by MDAD and its consultants, it was determined to be in MDAD’s best interest to reject all three proposals and pursue another procurement approach. The different approach was recommended because MDAD would have had to hire a different contractor to replace the obsolete train control system and integrate the electronics of the refurbished cars into one operating system, resulting in unclear responsibility between the two contractors if the system suffered any delays or failures and increased MDAD liability.

In the meantime, on October 27, 2011, Mitsubishi, the apparent low bidder for MDAD‐05‐10, conducted a 30‐day value engineering study of their low bid of $61,993,159 and proposed to MDAD to replace both lanes of the existing system for $40,520,000 or to replace the south lane only for $31,547,000. The proposal was reviewed thoroughly by MDAD and its consultants and could not be accepted due to its qualifications, deletions, unacceptable contract modifications, and equipment substitutions.


Research Notes

2


MDAD then hired a consultant team with expertise in architecture, structural engineering and APM technology to conduct a quick independent review and assessment of bids/proposals received by MDAD to date for different Satellite E replacement alternatives, to review and assess other potential APM refurbishment alternatives, and to review and assess the feasibility and cost effectiveness of providing a passenger connection via pedestrian bridges with automated moving walkways either north of or on top of the existing APM guideway. A pedestrian corridor was deemed feasible at an estimated cost of approximately $36 million and would consist of a two‐story bridge north of the existing guideway with an enclosure for 32,500 square‐feet of air‐conditioned space with three sets of automated moving walkways connecting the Satellite E building with the Terminal E. In summary, MDAD has concluded that passenger walking distance for connecting flights between the North Terminal and Satellite E would significantly exceed in some cases the 2,000‐foot‐threshold deemed acceptable passenger walking distance based on a survey of 14 major U.S. airports. Thus, it is MDAD’s conclusion that passengers would be better served by a cost‐effective APM system. While conducting the review and assessment of all alternatives, MDAD’s consultant team learned that a prominent and experienced airport APM system supplier, Doppelmayr Cable Car (DCC), experienced a cancellation of a train order which had already been manufactured. Based on this information, the consultant team opined that that supplier could be in a strong position to provide a highly attractive cost‐competitive bid for a completely new APM system. On April 16, 2012, MDAD received an unsolicited proposal from DCC which contained prices for three different options for a new APM system. The prices ranged from $27.75 million to $32.5 million. Based on this unsolicited proposal, MDAD has determined that with proper restructuring of the bid documents, bids for a new APM system may be competitive compared to the cost of a pedestrian bridge, while also providing a far superior level of passenger service. Given the above, MDAD can modify and reduce the scope of work of the previous bid documents and accept or reject value‐engineering proposals prior to bid opening. The modified scope will improve the chances of obtaining bids for the APM that will be cost competitive with the pedestrian bridge. MDAD will inform all potential bidders that Phase 1 bids submitted which are non‐competitive with the $36 million initial implementation cost of a pedestrian bridge may be found non‐responsive. Question What is current status of the procurement for the Concourse E Satellite Automated People Mover? Pursuant to MDAD, bids were being opened April, 12, 2013.

3B2 130544

RESOLUTION RATIFYING ACTION OF THE COUNTY MAYOR OR COUNTY MAYOR’S DESIGNEE, PURSUANT TO PROVISIONS OF ORDINANCE NO. 95‐64, IN ACCEPTING AND EXECUTING AN OTHER TRANSACTION AGREEMENT #HSTS04‐12‐H‐CT1081 WITH THE TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, PROVIDING FOR REIMBURSEMENT OF $2,991,299.00 FOR THE ENHANCEMENT OF THE SOUTH TERMINAL CHECKED BAGGAGE INSPECTION SYSTEM AT MIAMI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT(Aviation Department)

Notes The proposed resolution ratifies the actions of the Mayor’s designee, pursuant to provisions of the Aviation Department (MDAD) Expedite Ordinance No. 95‐64, codified as Section 2‐285 (6) of the Miami‐Dade County Code, in accepting and executing Other Transaction Agreement (OTA) #HSTS04‐12‐H‐CT1081 with the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) providing funding of $2,991,299.00 for enhancements to Miami International Airport’s (MIA) South Terminal Checked Baggage Inspection System (CBIS). Approval of this item authorizes the Mayor or designee to execute any further modifications or amendments to this agreement. FISCAL IMPACT This agreement represents TSA’s obligation to fund 100% of costs up to $2,991,299.00 for the design, engineering, construction and testing of upgrades to the MIA’s South Terminal CBIS. BACKGROUND The South Terminal inline CBIS was completed in 2007 prior to publication of TSA design guidelines. Since then, TSA has identified best practices resulting in its Planning Guidelines and Design Standards (PGDS) for inline baggage screening systems. These guidelines are regularly updated as additional best practices are identified. In order for the TSA and the airport users to recognize the benefits of these best practices, TSA has offered MDAD $2,991,299 to enhance MIA’s South Terminal inline CBIS in accordance with TSA’s PDGS Version 4.1. The scope of the project includes modifications to checked baggage resolution area, system reporting capabilities, and baggage conveyor components that will improve the security and performance of the existing CBIS. Question This Agreement was entered into on May 1, 2012. Why has it taken so long to come before to the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) for ratification?

3B3 130545

RESOLUTION RELATING TO OPA‐LOCKA EXECUTIVE AIRPORT; RATIFYING ACTION OF MAYOR OR MAYOR’S DESIGNEE IN APPROVING AND EXECUTING, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 2‐285(6) OF THE CODE OF MIAMI‐DADE COUNTY, A JOINT PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION UNDER FINANCIAL PROJECT NUMBER 42231719401 FOR FUNDING IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,148,489.00 FOR THE PAVEMENT REHABILITATION AND THE INTERIOR SERVICE ROAD PROJECTS AT THE AIRPORT(Aviation Department)

Notes The proposed resolution ratifies the actions of the Mayor or Mayor’s designee, pursuant to provisions of the Miami‐Dade Aviation


Research Notes

3


Department (MDAD) Expedite Ordinance No. 95‐64, codified as Section 2‐285 (6) of the Code of Miami‐Dade County, in accepting and executing Joint Participation Agreement 42231719401 (JPA) with the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) providing funding of $1,148,489.00 for the pavement rehabilitation and restoration of runways, associated taxiways and aprons, and construction of an interior service road at Opa‐locka Executive Airport. The JPA expires on June 30, 2015. This project has been approved for funding under MDAD’s Capital Improvement Program and is estimated to cost $2,296,978.00, with MDAD’s share totaling $1,148,489.00. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) previously provided a grant of $2,443,500 toward the construction of an Interior Road at Opa‐locka Executive Airport, representing 90% of that project’s estimated costs of $2,715,000. Of FDOT’s $1,148,489.00 in this Joint Participation Agreement, $135,750 is allocated to the Interior Road project. The remaining amount of $135,750 has already been funded in MDAD’s Capital Improvement Program. BACKGROUND MDAD has an ongoing program of maintaining runways, taxiways, and other paved areas at the County’s general aviation airports. In 2012, FDOT reported in its Statewide Airfield Pavement Master Program that there are significantly greater areas of airfield pavement distress at Opa‐locka Executive Airport than Kendall‐Tamiami Executive Airport. MDAD then began a reprogramming of its airfield pavement projects to promptly correct the pavement deficiencies at Opa‐locka Executive Airport requiring immediate rehabilitation. On October 25, 2012, the Metropolitan Planning Organization approved this reprogramming effort in its Transportation Improvement Program Amendment. Additional Information On February 5, 2013, the Board of County Commissioners through R‐73‐13, ratified the execution by the Mayor’s designee the Grant Agreement between Miami‐Dade County and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in the amount of $2,443,500 to provide grant funds for the construction of an interior service road at Opa‐Locka Executive Airport (OPF). Unlike Miami International Airport (MIA) and other airports, OPF has no interior service road that allows vehicles to travel within the secured Airside Operations Area. MDAD’s Airside Operations Division has long identified a need for the construction of a continuous, fully paved, interior service road to allow fuel, fire, service and security vehicles uninterrupted access between the eastern and western areas of the airport. Currently, these vehicles must travel around the exterior of the airport using public roads to access both sides of the airport. This is time consuming, inefficient and unsafe. The OPF Interior Service Road Project will result in a 2.69‐mile, asphalt, two‐lane interior service road at Opa‐locka Executive Airport. The project includes necessary modifications to existing fencing, identification card readers, and motorized airside access gates. The project also improves fence security and wildlife patrols by providing a paved road from which to conduct inspections, and will facilitate the redevelopment of the west side of OPF’s airfield.

3B4 130622

RESOLUTION RELATING TO MIAMI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT; RATIFYING ACTION OF MAYOR OR MAYOR’S DESIGNEE IN APPROVING AND EXECUTING, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 2‐285(6) OF THE CODE OF MIAMI‐DADE COUNTY, A JOINT PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION UNDER FINANCIAL PROJECT NUMBER 42043519401 FOR A GRANT IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,596,834.00 TO OFFSET THE COST OF WAY FINDING SIGNS AT THE AIRPORT(Aviation Department)

Notes The proposed resolution ratifies the actions of the Mayor or Mayor’s designee, pursuant to provisions of the Miami‐Dade Aviation Department (MDAD) Expedite Ordinance No. 95‐64, codified as Section 2‐285(6) of the Code of Miami‐Dade County, in accepting and executing a Joint Participation Agreement 42043519401 (JPA) with the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) providing funding of $2,596,834.00 for Way Finding Signage at Miami International Airport (MIA). FISCAL IMPACT This Joint Participation Agreement provides FDOT funding of $2,596,834.00 toward the total estimated cost of $6,655,050.00 for Way Finding Signage at MIA. Additional funding of $730,692.00 is programmed in FDOT’s Five Year Work Program for Fiscal Year 2014. MDAD’s Capital Improvement Program will fund any costs that exceed FDOT funding, which currently totals $3,327,526.00. BACKGROUND A comprehensive way finding and signage master plan was created for MIA in 2002 to establish a vision and long‐term range plan for MIA signage system. The objective of the Signage Standards and Guidelines is to provide a set of design standards, requirements and design criteria to be used for all interior and exterior signing applications at MIA. The plan provides basic criteria for future signs and graphics, and provides consistency in the presentation of information. As the Capital Construction Program progresses, this signage program is being implemented throughout MIA. Based on the standards in the master plan, MDAD has broadened its scope and applied key elements to outlying buildings at MIA and to General Aviation Airports in Miami‐Dade County. The signage master plan includes the development of general criteria for the signage and way finding program, specifically for areas used by the public (roadways, parking, terminal and concourses). MDAD assigned a budget of $7 million to the MIA Signage Program in 2007. The scope of the project includes the implementation of the Airport Signage and Way Finding Master Plan. The areas covered by this extensive project include the Terminal and Concourses, Curbside, Parking Garages and Roadways. The program includes both dynamic (electronic) and static signage for these areas. MDAD has implemented signage in conjunction with capital construction projects at MIA. Approximate expenditures to date include $2


Research Notes

4


million in static signage for the North Terminal, $1.8 million for dynamic signage in the North Terminal Federal Inspection Services area, $1 million for the South Terminal, $500,000 for dynamic signage in the South Terminal Federal Inspection Services area and $700,000 for the MIA Mover and North Terminal Skytrain Automated People Mover system signage.

3B5 130494

RESOLUTION APPROVING EXECUTION OF A LOCAL AGENCY PROGRAM AGREEMENT BETWEEN MIAMI‐DADE COUNTY AND THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO PROVIDE THE COUNTY WITH FUNDING UP TO $567,020.00 FOR THE REHABILITATION OF SONOVOID BRIDGE NUMBER 874476 LOCATED ON SW 328 STREET OVER LEVEE L‐31‐E; AND AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY MAYOR OR COUNTY MAYOR’S DESIGNEE TO EXERCISE THE PROVISIONS CONTAINED THEREIN(Public Works & Waste Management)

Notes The proposed resolution authorizes the execution of a Local Agency Program (LAP) Agreement between Miami‐Dade County (County) and the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). The LAP Agreement provides the County with up to $567,020.00 in Public Lands Highway Discretionary Program funds for the rehabilitation of Sonovoid Bridge Number 874476 (Project) in District 9. Fiscal Impact/Funding Source The total estimated cost of the Project including construction and construction engineering inspection is $567,020.00. This LAP Agreement requires that a local funding source provide upfront funding for the Project, to be reimbursed by FDOT. Background The Public Lands Highway Discretionary Program is administered by the Federal Highway Administration’s Federal Lands Highway Office, with funds available for transportation projects within, adjacent to, or which provide access to Federal lands or facilities. The rehabilitation of this bridge will preserve an existing facility that provides the only vehicular access to Biscayne National Park’s Visitor Center and Park Headquarters. The scope of work includes but is not limited to milling the existing asphalt on the bridge and replacing it with a 5‐inch reinforced concrete deck in order to distribute the traffic loads and ensure that all sonovoid slabs are sharing these loads. Safety improvements such as the replacement of the existing railings and guardrails will be also be performed. Additional work will include new slope protection in the area of the bridge and the replacement of bridge joints and the repairs of existing structural cracks on the bridge. A design by PWWM for the Project is underway and construction is anticipated to be completed by July 2015. Additional Information Pursuant to the LAP, the following lists the project’s schedule:

Design to be completed by November 30, 2103;

Right‐of‐Way requirements identified and provided to FDOT by December 31, 2013;

Right ‐of‐Way to be certified by December 31, 2013;

Construction contract to be let by January31, 2014; and

Construction to be completed by July 31, 2015. If this schedule cannot be met, the PWWM must notify FDOT in writing with a revised schedule or the project is subject to the withdrawal of federal funding.

3B6 130683

RESOLUTION APPROVING RATIFICATION OF THE CONTRACT AWARD TO KIEWIT INFRASTRUCTURE SOUTH CO., IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $31,000,000.00, FOR THE DESIGN‐BUILD SERVICES FOR THE PROJECT ENTITLED REHABILITATION OF BRIDGES NO. 874541 (WEST BRIDGE) AND 874544 (BEAR CUT BRIDGE) ON THE RICKENBACKER CAUSEWAY(Public Works & Waste Management)

Notes The proposed resolution ratifies the County’s Contract Award to Kiewit Infrastructure South Co. (Kiewit), for the Design‐Build Services for the Project Entitled Rehabilitation of Bridges No. 874541 (West Bridge) and 874544 (Bear Cut Bridge) on the Rickenbacker Causeway in District 7. Pursuant to the authority granted under Resolution No. R‐32‐13, approved by the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) on January 23, 2013, the Mayor approved the Contract Award to Kiewit on April 3, 2013. Fiscal Impact/Funding Source The fiscal impact will be approximately $28,000,000.00 for the design and construction of the bridges, and $3,000,000.00 for the design and construction of the water main. The work is to be funded using Future Financing proceeds backed by Causeway Toll Revenues. The replacement of the water main attached to the Bridges, will be funded by WASD with Water Renewal and Replacement Fund. Background The original Bridges were built in 1944 and consisted of a concrete substructure, steel girders, and a concrete deck superstructure. The Bridges were widened in the mid to early 1980’s with concrete substructures, pre‐stressed concrete girders and a concrete deck superstructure, and have undergone various maintenance and repair actions through the years in order to extend their life expectancy. The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) conducts recurring bridge inspections, with those performed in 2006, 2007, and 2010 not disclosing any critical findings. In March 2012, PWWM was informally notified via email by FDOT that the bridge inspection performed on January 7, 2012, found deterioration on various steel beams of the West Bridge, and that PWWM was “to correct such deficiencies before they become a critical deficiency.” As a result, PWWM immediately proceeded to restrict truck traffic to the right outside lane of the West Bridge for the inbound (Eastbound) direction, and as a further precaution moved to effectuate similar restrictions on the Bear Cut Bridge. Additionally, between the months of August to September, PWWM initiated detailed field inspections of the Bridge’s 584 steel beams


Research Notes

5


through the services of an engineering consultant. This effort also found previously undetected deterioration of the steel beams on the Bear Cut Bridge. This information was transmitted to FDOT, along with the request for a Load Rating in order to determine the load carrying capacity of the Bridges in their current condition. On October 19, 2012, based on the provided information, FDOT notified PWWM that the right outbound (westbound) lane on the Bear Cut Bridge had to be closed to traffic. PWWM immediately closed the lane upon being notified. However, in close coordination with FDOT, PWWM had its consultant re‐analyze the Load Rating for the bridges. This led to FDOT’s subsequent concurrence to open the closed lane by restricting traffic to cars on the outside lane, limiting heavier vehicles to the inside lane. FDOT’s formal letter of concurrence was received on November 1, 2012. PWWM implemented these restrictions through the installation of signs and pavement markings. PWWM continues to work closely with FDOT in monitoring and inspecting the Bridges on a monthly basis. A delay to commence the necessary construction activities can further delay the existing restrictions to the use of the bridges, placing a significant and prolonged impact on its users (e.g., Sony Open Tennis Tournament, Miami Seaquarium, Rickenbacker Marina, residents, and visitors). As a result of the repair work, the existing water main attached to the section of both bridges that will be repaired needs to be relocated. The current water main was installed in 1968 and is nearing its life expectancy. The new pipe will also be increased in size from the current 12 inches to 16 inches. Additionally, in an effort to improve access for pedestrians and cyclists, the project proposes to widen the Bear Cut Bridge. Once implemented, this work will provide a dedicated lane for pedestrians and cyclists on both sides of the Bear Cut Bridge, separated from vehicular traffic. Recent Legislation On January 23, 2013, the BCC through R‐33‐13 amended Implementing Order 4‐57 Adjusting the Toll Structure and Fees for the Rickenbacker Causeway. The resolution raised the cash toll effective April 1, 2013. The toll increase was required to fund the Causeway’s capital improvement program, including the priority repairs of the Bear Cut Bridge and West Bridge and will strengthen causeway reserves in order to facilitate the sale of bonds needed to fund these capital improvements. Pursuant to the BCC’s request at the January 14, 2013 Regional Transportation meeting, the Mayor provided a timeline and status report on the implementation of the Sunpass conversion in a Memo dated January 18, 2013. Listed below is the timeline of future milestones:

April 2013‐ The contract will go to the appropriate Committee of the BCC (as of April 12th has not been assigned to a committee);

o File Number 130642 is a resolution authorizing execution of an agreement in the amount of $4 million or $ 12 million if the option to renew periods are exercised to TransCore LP for the conversion of the existing toll system used at the Venetian and Rickenbacker Causeways. (However, legistar states this item is pending committee assignment/ pending waiver to go to BCC)

May 2013‐ The contract will go to the full BCC;

June 2013‐ The contract will be awarded;

June 2013‐ The awarded vendor will begin installation of equipment and software coordination with FTE for interoperability. This step is anticipated to take twelve months;

December 2013‐ Roadway work will begin. This step is anticipated to take up to four months; and

June 2014‐ The project is anticipated to be complete and ready for use. Additional Notes In response to questions posed by the Office of the Commission Auditor (OCA), Public Works staff provided the following information:

According to a letter, dated, February 11, 2005, Othon, Inc., entered into a Consulting Engineering Agreement with the County to perform inspection services at the Rickenbacker Causeway Bridges (William Powell and Bear Cut Bridge).

The letter states that the findings and recommendations of the report are based on a thorough research of existing information, project conditions, and on professional engineering judgment.

As it relates to the Bear Cut Bridge, the consultant concluded on Page 11 of 15 that the bridge appears to been maintained routinely, with exceptions of few area of slab concrete spalling, and 3 concrete piles shown exposed strands, and 3 other piles shown structural cracks, the overall structure appear to be in good condition. The consultant recommended the bridge needed to be repaired to prevent further deterioration and damage where the structural integrity of the bridge is compromised. The repairs should restore the bridge to its original design and intent to safely serve the public for a long time.

According to PWD staff: The 4 recommendations on Page 12 of 15 of the 2005 Othon Report were not implemented because they were not identified as critical in said report. These were:

1. Slab: Only a couple of isolated areas on the underside of the slab were identified for repair. This is confirmed by the fact that the estimated repair cost was only $ 7,000.

2. Beams: Report states that no major problems with the beams were noticed. An overcoat was proposed but this would not have done anything to address existing corrosion on the beams that were 61 years old at the time of the repair and would have cost an estimated $ 470,000.


Research Notes

6


3. Bents were found in good condition and well maintained.4. Only three piles were found to need repairs. As noted in item 2 below, over 30 piles were repaired in 2008.

There have been 4 major projects on the Bear Cut bridge that were completed during (roughly) the last 5 years:

1. Project # 20070597. The improvements to Rickenbacker Causeway consisted of milling and resurfacing of the existing roadway at Hobie Island; milling and resurfacing of the Bear Cut Bridge and West/Bay bridge (Southern Section), resurfacing of the bike paths on Hobie island and Key Biscayne (across from marina), pedestrian signals upgrading, shoulder widening at various intersections, signing and pavement markings, minor sidewalk repairs and concrete path installation. This project also includes the installation of handrails for the north side of William Powell Bridge, Bear Cut Bridge and the West Bridge as well as the replacement of joints on the Bear Cut Bridge and the West Bridge (Southern Section). Approximate construction cost of the total project $ 3,485,000

2. Project # 20080007. Pile jacketing and Cathodic protection of deteriorated piles of the Bear Cut Bridge. Approximate construction cost $ 545,000.

3. Project # 20080017. Repairs/replacement of the W. Powell and Bear Cut Bridge fender and dolphin systems. Approximate construction cost $ 122,650.

4. Project # 20090218. Repairs to deteriorated concrete beams on the Bear Cut Bridge. Approximate construction cost $ 311,920.

4C 130621

ORDINANCE RELATING TO ZONING; AMENDING REGULATING PLANS AND DEVELOPMENT PARAMETERS FOR DOWNTOWN KENDALL URBAN CENTER ZONING DISTRICT; AMENDING SECTIONS 33‐284.61 AND 33‐284.62 OF THE CODE OF MIAMI‐DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA (CODE); PROVIDING SEVERABILITY, INCLUSION IN THE CODE AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE

Notes The proposed ordinance relating to zoning, amends regulating plans and development parameters for Downtown Kendall Urban Center Zoning District (DKUCD), amending Sections 33‐284.61 and 33‐284.62 of the Code of Miami‐Dade County (Code). The DKUCD is located in District 7 and is comprised of two (2) contiguous areas on each side of US Highway 1. The western area is bounded by the Palmetto Expressway on the west, the Snapper Creek Expressway on the north and US Highway 1 on the east. The eastern area is bounded by US Highway 1 on the west, SW 80th Street on the north, SW 65th and SW 67

th Avenues on the east, and SW 84th Street and

Snapper Creek Canal on the south. The DKUCD is one of the County’s Urban Center Zoning Districts and it regulates development in the Dadeland Mall/Downtown Kendall area. The DKUCD ordinance contains a series of regulating plans which guide the form of the development within the district. DKUCD Proposed Amendments Section 33‐284.61 Regulating Plans

A new illustrative plan is provided under Subsections (B) Street Frontage Plan, and (C) Designated Open Space Plan. According to the Regulatory and Economic Resources (RER) Department, the proposed amendments under this section of the Code does the following:

The proposed ordinance amends street designations indicated in the Street Frontage regulating plan for parcels located between the Snapper Creek Canal and the SR 878 Expressway and between US1 and SW 70 Avenue. Streets in the DKUCD are organized along a hierarchy of five (5) street types assigned to existing and future locations from most important to least important as follows: the “A” Street is assigned to major, high traffic corridors within the District; “B” Streets are future streets of considerable importance; “C” Streets are flexible multifunctional corridors acting as pedestrian promenades or vehicular access drives or both; “D” Streets function as the District’s alleyways into garages and secondary functions of a development; and the “E” Street is US1. The “A” Street running from SW 70 Avenue to US1 is amended to a “C” Street, allowing for flexibility to an existing drive that cannot properly accommodate the street, frontage and habitable requirements of an “A” Street type. Two future streets designated “B” are proposed as “D" to better address existing development which occurred prior to adoption of the DKUCD.

The ordinance proposes a change to the DKUCD’s Designated Open Space regulating plan for parcels located between the Snapper Creek Canal and the SR 878 Expressway and between US1 and SW 70 Avenue as follows: The colonnade requirement for the re‐designated “A” to “C” Street is deleted; the north‐south oriented linear green requirement for a re‐designated “B” to “D” Street is deleted; and a green flanking the Metrorail guideway and US1 is also removed. The proposed “D” street type is predominately used as access into garage structures and back of house uses for existing and future development with minimal pedestrian participation; as such, the designated greens and their pedestrian accommodations would not be suited for said street type. The “C” street can accommodate pedestrian‐friendly and weather protection elements at street level, similar to the proposed to be deleted colonnade.

Section 33‐284.62 Development Parameters

Subsection (A) Placement Diagrams, under Core Sub‐District – C Street, Building Placement, the maximum allowable overhead cover is increased from 25 percent to 35 percent, and adds parking garages to the list of structures connecting buildings. According to the RER Department, this amendment does the following: The Core Sub‐district – “C” Street “overhead cover” building placement restriction to a maximum of twenty‐five (25) percent is increased to thirty‐five (35) percent. The District allows a portion of a “C” street to be covered with structures connecting buildings including roofs, upper story terraces, pedestrian bridges and automobile bridges. The thirty‐five (35) percent increase would allow a wider cover of the street to accommodate useable habitable areas and parking spaces in the Core Sub‐district.

Background and Relevant Legislation The DKUCD was adopted into the zoning code in 1999 by Ordinance No. 99‐166. Subsequently, this district has been amended by Ordinance Nos. 01‐129, 01‐156, 01‐161, 02‐11, 02‐152, 05‐197, 06‐114, and 09‐81.


Research Notes

7


In addition, item under File No. 130410, providing for electric vehicle retail showrooms in the DKUCD, is scheduled before the May 7, 2013 Board of County Commissioners and will further amend this zoning district. The chart below provides the previous legislation.

Date and Ordinance Downtown Kendall Urban Center District Previous Legislation

Dec. 16, 1999 Ord. No. 99‐166

ORDINANCE RELATING TO ZONING AND OTHER LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS; CREATING SECTIONS 33‐284.55, ET. SEQ., OF THE CODE OF MIAMI‐DADE COUNTY; PROVIDING FOR THE DOWNTOWN KENDALL URBAN CENTER ZONING DISTRICT; AMENDING SECTION 33C‐6 TO DELETE CURRENT PROVISIONS AND INSTEAD EXEMPT DISTRICT FROM CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF SECTION 33C; AMENDING SECTION 18‐A TO EXEMPT THE DISTRICT FROM CERTAIN LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS; AMENDING SECTION 33‐311, 33‐313 AND 33‐314 TO PROVIDE FOR CERTAIN REVIEW PROCEDURES; PROVIDING SEVERABILITY, INCLUSION IN THE CODE AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE

July 24, 2001 Ord. No. 01‐129

ORDINANCE RELATING TO ZONING REGULATION OF DOWNTOWN KENDALL URBAN CENTER DISTRICT; EXEMPTING CERTAIN NONCONFORMING STRUCTURES, USES AND OCCUPANCIES FROM REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 33‐35(C) OF THE CODE OF MIAMI‐DADE COUNTY PERTAINING TO REBUILDING AND OCCUPANCY OF DAMAGED NONCONFORMING STRUCTURES; CREATING SECTION 33‐284.65 OF THE CODE; PROVIDING SEVERABILITY, INCLUSION IN THE CODE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE

Sept. 25, 2001 Ord. No. 01‐156

ORDINANCE PERTAINING TO DOWNTOWN KENDALL URBAN CENTER ZONING DISTRICT; ALLOWING OFFSTREET PARKING WITHIN 300 FEET OF USE(S) TO BE SERVED WITHIN THE DISTRICT UPON SATISFACTION OF CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS; ALLOWING THE DIRECTOR OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT TO MODIFY OR DELETE CERTAIN STREETS IN THE DISTRICT UPON SATISFACTION OF CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS; AMENDING SECTIONS 33‐284.62(C)(4) AND 33‐284.62(C)(7) OF THE CODE OF MIAMI‐DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA; PROVIDING SEVERABILITY, INCLUSION IN THE CODE AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE

Oct. 23, 2001 Ord. No. 01‐161

ORDINANCE PERTAINING TO DOWNTOWN KENDALL URBAN CENTER ZONING DISTRICT; PROVIDING FOR BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO EXERCISE DIRECT JURISDICTION OVER APPLICATIONS TO MODIFY OR DELETE DECLARATIONS OF RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS ENCUMBERING PROPERTY IN THE DISTRICT; ALLOWING CERTAIN ONSTREET PARKING TO BE COUNTED TOWARDS REQUIRED PARKING; AMENDING SECTION 33‐314 (C) AND 33‐284.62 (C) (7) OF THE CODE OF MIAMI‐DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA; PROVIDING SEVERABILITY, INCLUSION IN THE CODE AND EFFECTIVE DATE

Sept. 12, 2002 Ord. No. 02‐152

ORDINANCE RELATING TO ZONING REGULATIONS OF DOWNTOWN KENDALL URBAN CENTER DISTRICT; MODIFYING REGULATING PLANS; MODIFYING PROVISIONS RELATING TO MEZZANINES AND MINIMUM WIDTH OF 'D' STREETS; PROVIDING SEVERABILITY, INCLUSION IN THE CODE AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE

Nov. 1, 2005 Ord. No. 05‐197

ORDINANCE RELATING TO ZONING REGULATIONS FOR DOWNTOWN KENDALL URBAN CENTER DISTRICT; MODIFYING SECTION 33‐284.61 REGULATING PLANS; AMENDING SECTION 33‐284.63 ADDITIONAL PARAMETERS PERTAINING TO PERMANENT POINT OF SALE SIGNS; PROVIDING SEVERABILITY, INCLUSION IN THE CODE AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE

July 18, 2006 Ord. No. 06‐114

ORDINANCE PERTAINING TO ZONING; AMENDING SECTION 33‐284.60 OF THE CODE OF MIAMI‐DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA PERTAINING TO DOWNTOWN KENDALL URBAN CENTER DISTRICT DESIGNATED OPEN SPACE PLAN MAP; PROVIDING SEVERABILITY, INCLUSION IN THE CODE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE

Sept. 1, 2009 Ord. No. 09‐81

ORDINANCE REVISING ZONING AND OTHER LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS PERTAINING TO THE DOWNTOWN KENDALL URBAN CENTER ZONING DISTRICT (''DKUCD''), AMENDING SECTIONS 33‐284.56 THROUGH 33‐284.63 AND SECTION 33‐314, CODE OF MIAMI‐DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, PROVIDING SEVERABILITY, INCLUSION IN THE CODE AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE

4D 130638

ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE OF NOT TO EXCEED $4,245,000,000.00 AGGREGATE PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF MIAMI‐DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA WATER AND SEWER SYSTEM REVENUE BONDS, IN MULTIPLE SERIES, AS ADDITIONAL BONDS UNDER SECTION 208 OF ORDINANCE NO. 93‐134, TO PAY COSTS OF CERTAIN IMPROVEMENTS TO WATER AND SEWER UTILITY; PROVIDING THAT DETAILS, TERMS AND OTHER MATTERS RELATING TO ADDITIONAL BONDS BE DETERMINED IN SERIES RESOLUTIONS; AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 93‐134 TO INCREASE RATE COVENANT; AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND EFFECTIVE DATE(Finance Department)

Notes The proposed ordinance (2013 Ordinance) authorizes the following:

The issuance of up to $4.245 billion of Water and Sewer System Revenue Bonds to do the following: o Fund the cost of the Water and Sewer Department’s capital improvement plan to the 2013 Ordinance (Authorized Projects);

and o Change the requirement of the Water and Sewer Department to maintain Net Revenues (i.e. Operating Revenues minus

Operating Expenses) at a level of 125 percent of the annual debt service requirement, an increase from the current level of 110 percent.

The Authorized Projects were previously approved by the Board as part of the Water and Sewer Department’s capital improvement program. Proceeds from the multiple series of bonds to be issued over time will be used to fund:

$879 million of capital replacement projects and upgrades to comply with a portion of a consent decree between the federal Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA), Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), and the County;

$2.692 billion of system rehabilitation needs to improve an aging infrastructure that’s more than 50 years old; and


Research Notes

8


$674 million for capitalized interest ($377 million), reserve fund ($254 million), and cost of issuance ($43 million). Although the consent decree projects are to be completed over a period from FY 2013 through FY 2027, the portion authorized by this 2013 Ordinance is the portion of those consent decree projects to be completed between FY 2013 and FY 2018 only. Fiscal Impact The bonds authorized by the 2013 Ordinance will only be issued pursuant to subsequent series resolutions adopted by the Board which will set the parameters for establishing the terms, maturities, interest rates and other details of each series of bonds. Until a series of bonds is issued, the enactment of the 2013 Ordinance will have no fiscal impact on the County. If all the bonds authorized by the 2013 Ordinance ($4.245 billion) are issued, the average incremental annual debt service is forecasted to be $279 million based on several 30 year bond issuances at an average annual interest rate of six percent. Water and Sewer Net Revenues are the pledged revenues to fund the debt service for these bonds. Debt Service Coverage The Master Ordinance contains a rate covenant whereby the County promised that it would maintain Net Operating Revenues in each fiscal year at least equal to 110 percent of the debt service requirements of the Water and Sewer Department’s senior lien revenue bonds. The rating agencies view this rate covenant to be less robust as compared to other highly rated water and sewer authorities. Because the County sets the water and rates to pay for operating and maintenance expenses, subordinated debt service, and renewal and replacement costs etc., the debt service coverage always exceeds 125 percent. Amending the Master Ordinance at this time to this higher debt service coverage is a way to improve our legal credit structure without incurring additional costs. The 2013 Ordinance increases the bond authorization under the Master Ordinance to provide funding for projects identified in Exhibit A which is reflective of the Water and Sewer Department’s five year capital improvement plan and amends the Master Ordinance to increase the rate covenant.

4E 130611

ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING AND APPROVING A SANITARY SEWER SPECIAL CONNECTION CHARGE FOR CONSTRUCTION OF SEWER IMPROVEMENTS TO BUILDINGS AND PROPERTIES WITHIN A CERTAIN AREA OF BISCAYNE BASIN; PROVIDING FOR COLLECTION OF SUCH ACTUAL CHARGES BY THE MIAMI‐DADE WATER AND SEWER DEPARTMENT; PROVIDING FOR UNPAID CHARGES TO BE A LIEN ON REAL PROPERTY; PROVIDING SEVERABILITY, INCLUSION IN THE CODE AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE(Water & Sewer Department)

Notes The proposed ordinance provides the Miami‐Dade Water and Sewer Department (WASD) with the authority to charge a sanitary sewer special connection charge for the expansion of the sewer facilities in the Biscayne Basin Area in Commission Districts 2, 3, and 5. FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE There is a fiscal impact to the County as total construction costs are estimated at $41,600,000. However, WASD will be reimbursed for 77.8% of the actual project construction costs through the collection of a sanitary sewer special connection charge from each property owner who requests new or increased sewer service. Sanitary sewer special connection charges paid by new users or users increasing their capacity will be non‐refundable after WASD awards a contract of any kind related to the design and/or construction of such improvements. The reimbursement is estimated at $32,378,044. The remaining estimated project construction costs, which equal $9,221,956 (22.2%), will be funded by a combination of Plant Expansion and Sewer Renewal and Replacement Funds. There is a fiscal impact to the County’s current budget and to future annual budgets until the construction project is completed and WASD is reimbursed the full 77.8% of the actual total construction cost by the property owners. BACKGROUND The facilities currently serving the area are inadequate to serve increased usage in existing buildings, or new buildings expected to be constructed. This project will provide the sewer system capacity needed to accommodate the large scale developments proposed for this area. WASD estimates that future sewer service customers in the area will require an average of 7,640,000 gallons per day of new or increased capacity which will be provided by the new sewage facilities. WASD will design and construct these new sewer facilities with its own funds and will be reimbursed 77.8% of the total actual project construction costs estimated to total $32,378.044. The sanitary sewer construction connection charge is determined by dividing the total estimated cost of additional capacity, which is $32,378,044, by the total estimated additional capacity of 7,640,000 gallons per day, resulting in a charge of $4.24 per gallon. WASD will be compensated by collecting from each property owner who requests increased sewer service or new sewer service in the Biscayne Basin Area a sanitary sewer special connection charge at the time WASD’s verification form is issued. The verification form is used by WASD to verify that sewer facilities are sufficient and that system capacity exists to serve the applicant’s project. The form is issued after WASD confirms the sewer facilities and the system capacity are available. This confirmation takes place prior to the issuance of the building permit or a certificate of use and/or occupancy by the City of Miami. The sanitary sewer special connection charge will be collected until WASD is reimbursed in full for 77.8% of the actual project construction costs. On May 2, 2012, the BCC, through Ord. No. 12‐36, approved a sanitary sewer special connection charge in the area near Brickell Avenue


Research Notes

9


bounded by the Miami River to the north, I‐95 to the west, SW 21 Street to the south and Biscayne Bay to the east.

4F 130670

ORDINANCE REMOVING THE SUNSET PROVISION OF THE ECONOMIC STIMULUS ORDINANCE; AMENDING SECTION 2‐8.2.7 OF THE CODE; PROVIDING SEVERABILITY, INCLUSION IN THE CODE, AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE(Internal Services)

Notes The proposed ordinance amends Section 2‐8.2.7 of the Code of Miami‐Dade County to remove the sunset provision from the Economic Stimulus Program (ESP). The ESP Ordinance was originally established in 2008 with a one‐year sunset provision, which was later extended through 2011 and again through June 30, 2013. The ESP is a tool to expedite construction projects by accelerating the procurement process, and removal of the sunset date to continue the ESP is recommended to ensure that all projects approved as part of the ESP list can continue to utilize this program. This item also updates the names of the County departments involved in the ESP. On July 17, 2008, the Board established the County’s ESP Program through Ordinance No. 08‐92. The sunset date for this Ordinance has been extended several times since the inception of the program, with a current sunset date of June 30, 2013. Given the success of this program in moving capital projects at an accelerated pace, as well as positive feedback from the architectural and engineering community, and the construction industry as a whole, approval is requested to remove the sunset provision from this Ordinance. This program has helped expedite more than $1 billion in capital construction projects, while continuing to follow all Board policies relating to competitive selection of contractors and application of community and local business enterprise contracting goals. Background on the ESP The ESP Program was adopted by the BCC on July 17, 2008 through Ordinance 08‐92, and later amended through Ordinance 09‐60 to include ARRA funded projects and extend the sunset provision. The ESP Program was most recently amended through Ordinance 11‐49 to further extend the sunset provision through July 2013. The purpose of the ESP Program is to expedite construction contracts and professional services agreements associated with funded capital improvements projects that are: 1) in the Capital Budget, 2) included in Resolution R‐851‐08, or 3) subsequently added through separate BCC approved resolutions. The ESP Program continues to be an effective way of accelerating the County’s capital program by moving funded projects through the contracting approval process.

7A 130662

ORDINANCE RELATING TO ZONING AND OTHER LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS; PROVIDING FOR THE PALMER LAKE METROPOLITAN CENTER DISTRICT; AMENDING STANDARD URBAN CENTER DISTRICT REGULATIONS GOVERNING NON‐CONFORMITIES; CREATING SECTIONS 33‐284.99.55 THROUGH 33‐284.99.66 OF THE CODE OF MIAMI‐DADE COUNTY (CODE); AMENDING SECTIONS 33‐2 AND 33‐284.89.2 OF THE CODE; PROVIDING SEVERABILITY, INCLUSION IN THE CODE AND AN EFFECTIVE DATE [SEE ORIGINAL ITEM UNDER FILE NO. 130199](Regulatory and Economic Resources)

Notes The proposed ordinance, relating to zoning and other land development regulations, does the following:

Provides for the Palmer Lake Metropolitan Urban Center District (PLMUC), creating Sections 33‐284.99.55 through 33‐284.99.66 of the Code of Miami‐Dade County (Code);

Amends Section 33‐2, Districts Enumerated, to include the PLMUC; and

Amends Section 33‐284.89.2(b)(3)(b), the Non‐Conforming section of the Standard Urban Center District Regulations to revise the valuation method of a structure damaged by an act of force majeure. The proposed amendment would establish the structure’s replacement cost as the average of two independent appraisals. This amendment would affect properties within Palmer Lake and in zoning districts that cross‐reference the Standard Urban Center District Regulations.

At the March 14, 2013 Land Use and Development Committee (LUDC) meeting, this item was amended to include language requiring that additional water‐related and water dependent uses be approved by the County Commission instead of the Director, and to require hotels in the Riverside sub‐district to provide soundproofing. The committee amendments above addresses some of the concerns expressed at the March 14, 2013 LUDC meeting by committee members, and representatives from the Miami River Commission (MRC) and the Miami River Marine Group (MRMG):

The proposed ordinance allows a density of up to 375 units per acre for potential hotels, motels, and transient residential use which is inconsistent with the cargo shipping industry in the Riverside Sub‐District area of the Miami River.

o According to the Department of Regulatory and Economic Resources (RER), the zoning ordinance provided for a Core, Center, and Riverside area. The 375 units per acre were allowed in the Core and Center areas; however, a water‐dependent use must be provided in order for the 375 units to be allowed in the Riverside area. The water‐dependent uses are now limited to shipyard, boatyard or marina.

o Furthermore, residential buildings were not allowed under the current zoning, and would not be allowed along the river under the new zoning.

o Residential units would be permitted along the Tamiami Canal if a water‐dependent use is provided; however, residential uses would not be allowed along the Okeechobee portion of the river.

Other water‐dependent uses not specifically enumerated in this section or in the IU‐1 and IU‐2 districts as determined by the director” with “Other water‐dependent uses not specifically enumerated in this section or in the IU‐1 and IU‐2 districts as approved by resolution of the County Commission”.

Include the appropriate soundproofing above the level currently required in the Airport ordinance.


Research Notes

10


The PLMUC would be applicable exclusively to the Palmer Lake area and provide for the following:

Mixed uses, including retail, office, residential and industrial uses in the Core and Core East areas;

Industrial, water‐dependent and water‐related uses along the Miami River, Tamiami Canal and Palmer Lake;

Building standards that will require new buildings to be developed in an attractive pedestrian and transit supportive manner;

Street standards that will require future right‐of‐way improvements to provide for ample sidewalk areas and bicycle facilities, as well as encourage on‐street parking areas and landscaping;

Reduced parking requirements for developments located in proximity to the MIC and providing mixed uses and workforce housing units;

Landscape and open space standards; and

Pedestrian access to the Miami River, Tamiami Canal and Palmer Lake. Background and Relevant Legislation

On June 2, 2009, under Resolution No. R‐728‐09, the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) directed the County Mayor or his designee to organize a charrette for the Palmer Lake area.

From October 16 to October 25, 2010, the Sustainability, Planning and Economic Enhancement Department held 12 public meetings, including the Palmer Lake Charrette and Charrette Design Workshop.

On January 18, 2012, the members of the Palmer Lake Charrette Steering Committee forwarded the Palmer Lake Charrette Area Plan Report to the Planning Advisory Board (PAB) and the BCC for their consideration and approval.

On February 22, 2012, the members of the PAB recommended approval of the Palmer Lake Charrette Area Plan report and endorsed its recommendations.

Subsequently, on May 1, 2012, under Resolution No. 393‐12, the BCC approved the Palmer Lake Charrette Area Plan report.

Palmer Lake Charrette Area Plan Report Recommendations Implementation

Establishment of a Community Redevelopment Area to assist in the implementation of plan recommendations.

Zoning code amendments maintaining existing existing uses and implementing plan recommendations regarding building standards and right of way improvements consistent with the Port of Miami River Sub‐element Objective PMR‐1.

Modification of the existing Le Jeune Terminals Special Taxing District to implement new street light fixtures to match those installed adjacent to the MIC and/or those of the Miami River Greenway.

New zoning district applied to the entire study area permitting maximum flexibility of use consistent with the Port of Miami River Sub‐element Objective PMR‐1.

Infrastructure

Construction of sidewalks throughout the study area.

Parking, bike lanes, landscaping, expanded sidewalk area along NW 37th Avenue.

Reconstruction of NW S. River Dr. with bike lanes, parking, sidewalks, landscaping.

Entrance features.

Extension of NW 37th Avenue to South River Drive.

Street furniture.

Minimum 15 foot sidewalk width.

Electric vehicle charging stations adjacent to on‐street parking lanes.

On‐street parking throughout the study area.

Dredging of the Tamiami Canal.

On‐street parking, on‐road bike lanes along NW 37th Avenue. Transportation

Elevated walkway network extending from the Central Station to properties throughout the MIC Core Area.

Roundabout at NW 37th Avenue and 25th Street intersection.

Extension of NW 37th Avenue to North River Drive via new Miami River Bridge.

Bike lanes along the designated Miami River Greenway.

Bike lanes along South River Drive between NW 25th and 28th Streets.

On‐road bike lanes along 37th Avenue north of 25th Street.

Provide multi‐modal freight services between Miami International Airport, Port of Miami, Port of Miami River, and freight railroads.

8B1 130100

RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF CONSENT AGREEMENT AND SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WITH THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE (''DOJ'') REGARDING ALLEGED VIOLATIONS IN DOJ FINDINGS LETTER DATED AUGUST 24, 2011(Corrections & Rehabilitation Department)

Notes This resolution approves the proposed consent agreement between Miami‐Dade County and the Public Health Trust and the U.S. Department of Justice, and the settlement agreement between Miami‐Dade County, which operates the Miami‐Dade Corrections and Rehabilitation Department, and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ). Background On August 24, 2011, the DOJ issued a Findings Letter, alleging various constitutional violations in the correctional facilities operated by the Miami‐Dade County Corrections and Rehabilitation Department (MDCR). The following is a summary of the findings:

MDCR is deliberately indifferent to the suicide risks and serious mental health needs of its prisoners.

MDCR fails to provide adequate acute care, chronic care, outpatient treatment and discharge services to prisoners with mental


Research Notes

11


illness.

MDCR is deliberately indifferent to the serious medical needs of prisoners including access to care for acute medical needs, management of chronic health problems and record keeping and quality assurance.

MDCR fails to provide adequate intake screening, initial health assessments and acute care for newly incarcerated prisoners.

MDCR is engaged in a pattern or practice of using excessive force against prisoners.

MDCR is deliberately indifferent to the serious risk of harm to prisoners posed by fellow prisoners.

The conditions of confinement within the Jail expose prisoners to an unreasonable risk of harm from inadequate fire and life safety systems and environmental health and sanitation deficiencies, including unreasonable risk of infection from overcrowding and inadequate laundry, housekeeping and pest control.

The medical and mental health issues are primarily the responsibility of Corrections Health Services, a division of the Public Health Trust, while the issues concerning jail operations are under the purview of the Miami‐Dade Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. In response to the Findings Letter, the Miami‐Dade Corrections and Rehabilitation Department and Corrections Health Services (“the County”) provided the DOJ a comprehensive matrix which correlates numerous measures already undertaken by the County with the corresponding remedial responses identified in the Findings Letter, as well as substantial documentation of the numerous measures implemented since the time of the inspections. On October 4, 2011, County representatives met with the DOJ in Washington, D.C., to discuss these documented changes. As a result, the DOJ agreed to re‐inspect the Jail facilities on November 30 – December 2, 2011. After the re‐inspection, they concluded that significant improvements had been made in many areas, while other conditions still warranted remedial efforts. Fiscal Impact Operating costs borne by Miami‐Dade County will be supported by the Countywide General Fund. Capital costs are supported either through the bond proceeds or the Capital Outlay Reserve, depending upon the project. Operating costs borne by the Public Health Trust will be supported by operating revenues, including the maintenance of effort paid by the County. Consent Agreement Issues related to medical and mental healthcare, including suicide prevention, are addressed by the consent agreement. The consent agreement is filed with and enforced by a federal district court. While improvements in medical and mental healthcare were acknowledged by the DOJ, it required a consent agreement to address these issues as these improvements were more recent and not as fully implemented. The consent agreement requires:

The construction of the Mental Health Treatment Facility at an estimated cost of $12,000,000 ‐ $16,000,000, which is currently funded in the Building Better Communities General Obligation Bond Program.

Operations of the Mental Health Treatment Facility will be phased in commencing by the end of 2014 with an estimated annual cost of $22,000,000 for custodial staff, once fully operational.

The implementation of an electronic medical records system estimated at $230,000;

Additional mental health staffing with an estimated cost of $7,317,000, once fully operational;

Additional medication and supplies estimated at $293,000; and

The annual cost of $125,000 for an outside Monitor for medical‐related provisions.

Settlement Agreement Issues related to jail operations are addressed by the settlement agreement. The settlement agreement is referred to as a “private party settlement agreement,” and while not under direct oversight by a court, the DOJ retains the ability to initiate an action in the event of noncompliance by the County. The DOJ agreed to utilize a settlement agreement for issues relating to jail operations because related improvements had been in place and sustained for a substantial period of time. The settlement agreement is expected to remain in effect between five to seven years as individual provisions shall terminate after the DOJ confirms the maintenance of substantial compliance for a period of 18 months. Significant cost implications associated with the settlement agreement include:

An automated jail management system with an installation cost of $6,000,000 and annual maintenance cost of $500,000;

Additional video monitoring equipment estimated at $1,200,000; and

Increased staff training with an estimated annual cost of $1,300,000 annually.

Additional costs include $300,000 for a comprehensive staffing analysis and plan, as well as any required additional security staffing identified by the staffing analysis; and

The cost of an outside Monitor for jail operation‐related provisions estimated at $250,000 annually until the completion of the settlement agreement.

8F1 130617

RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONTRACT AWARD RECOMMENDATION IN THE AMOUNT OF $6,605,178.00 TO LINK CONSTRUCTION GROUP, INC. FOR THE HISTORIC HAMPTON HOUSE RESTORATION, BUILDING BETTER COMMUNITIES GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND PROGRAM PROJECT NUMBER 255 ‐ ''HISTORIC HAMPTON HOUSE RESTORATION''; (PROJECT NO. Z000110 GOB ESP; CONTRACT NO: Z000110)(Internal Services)

Notes The proposed resolution approves a Contract Award recommendation in the amount of $6,605,178 between Link Construction Group, Inc. and Miami‐Dade County for the Historic Hampton House Restoration (Project No. Z000110 GOB ESP; Contract No: Z000110).


Research Notes

12


The Hampton House Restoration Project consists of the restoration of a two‐story, 22,000 square foot structure, creating a multi‐purpose facility for the Brownsville community and adjacent neighborhoods. All of the work must comply with Miami‐Dade County’s Historic Preservation Ordinance and the Secretary of Interior Standards for Restoration and Rehabilitation. This project was included as part of the BBC‐GOB Program approved by Miami‐Dade County voters on November 2, 2004. Fiscal Impact The total Hampton House Restoration Project budget of $9,016,000, consisting of land/building acquisition, planning and design, construction, construction management, and contingency, is broken down into the following funding sources:

$6,500,000 of Building Better Communities – General Obligation Bond (BBC‐GOB) funding; and

$2,516,000 of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding. The CDBG funding portion includes the additional $1.2 million that was approved by the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) on March 5, 2013 under Resolution No. 165‐13 (File No. 130343). Question: To date, how much of the total project funds have been utilized (provide breakdown)? Status of the project?

The proposed resolution pertains solely to the award of the construction contract portion of the project to Link Construction Group, Inc. The Contract Award totaling $6,605,178 is comprised of approximately $5,634,000 in BBC‐GOB and $971,178 in CDBG funds. Subcontractors

Florida Lemark ‐ Concrete/Steel

Thunder Electric ‐ Electrical

A&P Mechanical ‐ Mechanical/Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning

Proglass Systems, LLC ‐ Glazing/Store Front

C.L. Elias Construction, Inc. – Drywall

Al Hill Enterprise Corporation ‐ Plumbing Additional Notes Link Construction Group, Inc. According to the company’s website, Link Construction Group was founded in April 2001 by Guillermo Fernandez and Miguel Cerra. They provide a variety of construction services including Pre‐Construction, General Contracting, Construction Management and Design/Build. The following projects are included in the company’s portfolio, under the historic restoration section:

Hialeah Park Racetrack Clubhouse & Facility Historic Restoration Historical renovation and cosmetic enhancement to the 100,000 square foot, clubhouse portion of the Hialeah Park Race Track. With the existing facility being closed for over 9 years, the clubhouse, grandstand area, racetrack, and existing administrative building had to be fully restored to its historical 1950’s look. The fast track project was completed on time and was ready for its grand re‐opening, the 2009 race season.

Hialeah Park Racetrack Renovation and Casino Expansion Project The Phase II portion of the project entails the complete renovation of the existing North Grandstand Building and the construction of a two‐story, 180,000 sq. ft. casino addition, a porte‐cochere and a network of covered arcades and elevated terraces surrounding the revitalized historic paddock and Flamingo Fountain Garden.

Miami Green Lab – LEED Silver The grant funded City of Miami project consisted of the restoration/renovation of the City of Miami’s Fire Station No. 14 into an educational resource center for green building programs and offices for the City’s Office of Sustainable Initiatives (MSI). The new center was designed with sustainable features, including a rainwater collection system, solar hot water heater, native landscaping, and monitoring systems. The building offers functional rooms that support the resource building’s initiatives, such as a gallery for seminars and products, a computer lab, a kitchen, offices, and a lobby/sitting area.

8G1 130655

RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SETTLEMENT OF THE LAWSUIT BETWEEN THE CITY OF MIAMI, THE SOUTHEAST OVERTOWN/PARK WEST COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND MIAMI‐DADE COUNTY RELATING TO BLOCKS 36, 45 AND 56 LOCATED IN MIAMI‐DADE COUNTY(Office of Management and Budget)

Notes The proposed resolution authorizes the settlement of the lawsuit between the City of Miami (City), the Southeast Overtown/Park West Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA), and Miami‐Dade County (County) relating to Blocks 36, 45 and 56 located in Miami‐Dade County. Approving the Settlement Agreement (Agreement) between the County, City and the Southeast Overtown/Park West CRA will dismiss with prejudice the case of City of Miami et al. v. Miami‐Dade County, Case No 07‐46851 CA 31 (lawsuit) in accordance with the terms of the settlement agreement for the properties on Blocks 36, 45N and 56N (Blocks) located in Overtown, City of Miami. This item seeks to settle that lawsuit in which the County, the City, and the CRA, each claim ownership of the Blocks. As part of the Agreement, the Board is also approving a Declaration of Restrictions (Declaration) that imposes certain development criteria and restrictions on the Blocks. The CRA and City approved the Agreement on March 25, 2013 and March 28, 2013, respectively. The significant highlights of the proposed Agreement and Declaration include, but are not limited to, the following:


Research Notes

13


Conveyance by the County and the City to the CRA of all title and interest in the Blocks, immediately followed by two solicitations being issued by the CRA to develop the Blocks (one for 45 and 56 and the other for Block 36) in accordance with minimum requirements for development as set in the Agreement. The Properties will be conveyed to the selected developers prior to commencement of construction.

Preservation of the history and character of the Overtown area, while incorporating the theme of “Live, Work and Play,” to the fullest extent possible.

Development of a Retail Component with a minimum of 150,000 square feet of retail, office, hotel and/or permitted institutional space with, at a minimum, structural parking spaces required by Code to accommodate the development on Blocks 45 and 56, and construction of 30,000 square feet of retail plus a parking garage including 300 parking spaces on Block 36.

Additionally, development on Blocks 45 and 56 of a minimum of 60 affordable housing units (Residential Component), of which ten percent will be available for families earning 30 percent or less of the area median income (AMI), 70 percent will be made available for families earning between 30 and 80 percent of AMI, and the remaining 20 percent will be made available for families earning between 80 and 140 percent of AMI. The CRA will be responsible for development of an additional 100 residential units in the area. Pursuant to R‐556‐09, the AMI in Miami‐Dade County is detailed further in this memorandum.

Phases of construction will be scheduled with a preference on completion of the Retail Component prior to the Residential Component although both components can be under construction simultaneously.

Requires information regarding job opportunities for local area residents and businesses to allow them to participate in the construction of the development, including at least two local job fairs prior to the commencement of each development phase.

Requires information regarding job opportunities for local area residents and local businesses post‐construction, including newly generated trade and service related jobs, including at least one job fair upon completion of each development phase.

Provides for a Project Payment from the developer to the County and CRA as noted in the fiscal impact section.

Authorizes the CRA Executive Director to modify the agreement by up to ten percent with respect to the square footage in the Retail Component and the number of units in the Residential Component, but not the percentage allocations of housing units by AMI, without further City and County approval provided the modifications are in writing. Any other variances from the requirements of the Restrictive Covenant, proposed by a Developer or the CRA, would require approval of this Board.

Provides for enforcement by the County of the provisions of the Declaration and the Settlement Agreement by motion filed with the Court in the event of non‐compliance or by reverter.

The Board would be required to approve any proposed Developers selected by the CRA within 45 days of notice by the CRA, in order for the Developer to be selected. The only exception is that if the CRA enters a Development Agreement with Gatehouse Group LLC (Gatehouse), previously selected pursuant to a prior Request for Proposal issued by the CRA on Block 36, for the development of Block 36, no approval would be needed by the County.

Fiscal Impact According to the Miami‐Dade County Property Appraiser, the 2012 Preliminary Assessed Value for the three Blocks to be conveyed is $7,822,830. The County will convey these properties, at no initial cost to the CRA (which will convey the properties to the selected developers prior to construction), in exchange for development that will serve as a catalyst for redevelopment in the Overtown area and guaranteed future Project Payments to the County and the CRA. The selected developer will make separate Project Payments to the County and the CRA as follows:

Blocks 45 and 56, the greater of 2.5 percent of Gross Rent paid for occupancy of space within the retail component, or $122,000 each per year for five years with a three percent annual increase thereafter, and

Block 36, the greater of 2.5 percent of Gross Rent or $38,500 each per year under the same payment structure. The payments on all Blocks would commence 30 days from issuance of the temporary certificate of occupancy on the retail component, but no later than five years after this Settlement is recorded, and would continue for a 25 year period.

Development Timeframe: Blocks 45 and 56

Obtain all land use and zoning approvals for both the Retail and Residential Components within two years of this settlement.

Commence vertical construction within three years of this settlement.

Substantially complete construction of the Retail and Residential Components within two years of commencement of vertical construction.

The CRA Executive Director will have the ability to modify the time frames of the development, square footage of the retail development and number of units of the residential component by no more than ten percent without further City and County Board approval.

Block 36

Obtain all land use and zoning approvals for the Retail and Parking Components within two years of this settlement (within one year if selected developer is Gatehouse in light of the prior CRA Request for Proposal approving negotiation of a development agreement with this developer).

Commence vertical construction within three years of this settlement (within two years if Gatehouse).

Substantially complete construction of the Retail and Residential Components within two years of commencement of vertical construction.

The CRA Executive Director will have the ability to modify the time frames of the development of the square footage of the retail development and number of units of the residential component by no more than ten percent without further City and County Board


Research Notes

14


approval. The Declarations provide for a Default Notice if the developer fails to obtain all land use and zoning approvals or fails to substantially complete the Retail, Parking, and Residential Components within their respective timeframes. In either instance, the developer may extend the approval or respective completion dates by six months by paying $250,000 to each the CRA and County. Reverter Clause Reverter to the County may be exercised by the County if:

Vertical construction is not commenced as set forth above,

The CRA attempts to select a developer two times and is unable to select and forward the name of a selected developer to the County (either receives no bids or is unable to select), or

The construction is not complete within six years (although the portion of Block 36 including the parking garage will not revert if that portion is constructed). At all times, the County has the right, in addition to the reverter, to enforce compliance with the restrictions and covenants by motion filed with the Court.

8H1 130094

& Supplement 130627

RESOLUTION WAIVING COMPETITIVE BIDDING BY A TWO‐THIRDS VOTE PURSUANT TO SECTION 26‐34 OF THE COUNTY CODE, AND ARTICLE 5.03(D) OF THE HOME RULE CHARTER; AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR OR MAYOR’S DESIGNEE TO NEGOTIATE PROGRAMMING PARTNERSHIP OPERATING AGREEMENT(S) WITH THE YMCA OF GREATER MIAMI FOR CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF UP TO SEVEN FACILITIES LOCATED AT KENDALL INDIAN HAMMOCKS PARK, IVES ESTATES PARK, TAMIAMI PARK, OAK GROVE PARK OR ALTERNATIVE SITE AS DETERMINED BY THE PARKS, RECREATION AND OPEN SPACES DEPARTMENT, WEST KENDALL DISTRICT PARK, CHUCK PEZOLDT PARK, AND NORTH POINTE PARK; AND FOR THE PROGRAMMING PARTNERSHIP OPERATING AGREEMENT(S) TO BE BROUGHT BEFORE THE BOARD FOR FINAL APPROVAL [SEE ORIGINAL ITEM UNDER FILE NO. 122455](Parks, Recreation and Open Spaces) SUPPLEMENT TO MARKET RESEARCH REGARDING COMMUNITY BASED ORGANIZATIONS INTEREST AND CAPACITY IN DEVELOPING REGIONAL RECREATIONAL CENTERSON COUNTY OWNED LAND

Notes Pursuant to Article 5.03(D) of the Home Rule Charter and Section 26‐34 of the Code, the proposed resolution waives competitive bidding by vote of two‐thirds of the members of the County Commission present and finds such waiver to be in the best interests of Miami‐Dade County in order to authorize the Mayor or his designee to negotiate Programming Partnership Operating Agreement(s) with the YMCA of Greater Miami. The proposed resolution provides for the construction and operation of facilities at : 1) Kendall Indian Hammocks Park, located in District 10; 2) Ives Estates Park, located in District 1; 3) Tamiami Park, located in District 11; 4) Oak Grove Park or alternative site as determined by the Parks, Recreation and Open Spaces Department (PROS), located in District 2; 5) West Kendall District Park, located in District 11; 6) Chuck Pezoldt Park, located in District 9; and 7) North Pointe Park, located in District 1; and to present the negotiated Programming Partnership Operating Agreement(s) to the Board for final approval. At the January 14, 2013 Recreation and Cultural Affairs Committee meeting, this item was amended to clarify that one of the proposed Regional Recreation Centers will be located at Oak Grove Park or an alternate site located with District 2. The proposed resolution provides for the establishment of up to seven Regional Recreational Centers (RRCs) on County park land and requires the following:

Once negotiated, the Mayor or his designee will bring the Programming Partnership Operating Agreement(s) to the Board for final approval.

The existing operations will remain with the PROS Department.

Authorizes the YMCA to build the actual infrastructure, operate it and maintain it. Supplement On February 26, 2013, the Internal Services Department (ISD) issued a Request for Information (RFI) to 43 community‐based, non‐profit organizations to gather information to assist the County in determining availability and interest by these agencies in regard to the most cost effective and beneficial way of financing, constructing and operating multiple Regional Recreational Centers (RRC) on County‐owned park land. Respondents to this RFI were encouraged to provide information concerning the viability of successfully financing, designing, constructing, operating and maintaining multiple 40,000 square foot recreational facilities in specific County park sites. Furthermore, respondents were asked to provide: (1) proof of their capability to finance, design, construct, maintain and operate RRCs on County owned park land; (2) a draft time‐line for the funding, design and construction of the RRCs with uniform construction and programming across all facilities preferred; and (3) three references to establish a proven record of building and operating such facilities in other jurisdictions within the past five years. One response was received from the YMCA of Greater Miami. Fiscal Impact There will be no fiscal impact to the County in the construction and operation of the RRCs. The YMCA will pay 100% of the costs associated with the construction and operation of developed RRCs. The County will continue to develop park infrastructure and active recreation amenities outside of the estimated 40,000 sq.ft. RRCs in accordance with approved master plans using Building Better Communities General Obligation Bond (BBC‐GOB) funds, or other available capital funding sources.


Research Notes

15


In light of PROS’ limited available capital and operating funds, it is recommended to waive competitive bidding and select the YMCA to finance, construct and operate up to seven proposed RRC sites. Currently, PROS has two large community recreation centers built, maintained and operated on County park land by the Boys and Girls Club in Kendall and in Northwest Miami‐Dade. PROS operates and maintains two large recreation centers, at Goulds Park in South Dade and the NFL YET Center at Gwen Cherry Park in Liberty City, and has also partnered with the Gwen Cherry Park Foundation in the construction of an addition to the NFL YET Center.

8L1 130609

RESOLUTION APPROVING A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN MIAMI‐DADE COUNTY AND F.A. JOHNSON, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, IN THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF $83,000 AND THE RETAINAGE HELD IN FEMA CONTRACT 20070579, HURRICANE WILMA STORM DRAIN CLEANING PROGRAM STDC7(Public Works & Waste Management)

Notes The proposed resolution approves a Mediation Settlement Agreement between Miami‐Dade County (County) and F.A. Johnson, Inc. in the maximum amount of $83,000.00 and the retainage of $13,000, held in Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Contract 20070579, Hurricane Wilma Storm Drain Cleaning Program STDC7. As a result of Hurricane Wilma, in fiscal year 2006 the County advertised for bid four (4) FEMA Hurricane Wilma Storm Drain Cleaning contracts. These were countywide maintenance contracts involving the clean out of existing drainage structures and associated culverts. Each Unit Price Work Order Contract was awarded for an aggregate amount of $1.7 million to the lowest, responsive, and responsible bidder, for a period of 365 calendar days, with the option to extend the contract time for an additional 180 calendar days, upon mutual agreement between the contractor and PWWM’s director, and approval of the County Manager. F.A. Johnson, Inc. was awarded one (1) of the contracts and performed countywide drain cleaning work in the total amount of $1,001,665.00 during the contract period of February 26, 2007, to February 26, 2008. One of the other awarded contractors, Envirowaste Performance Systems, Inc. (Envirowaste), received work orders totaling $1,630,547.00. All of the FEMA storm drain cleaning work was completed satisfactorily under the four (4) contracts. F.A. Johnson’s position is that it would not have bid on the project if it had been clear that it would have to increase the amount of trucks to compete with the other contractors to be assigned the remaining work. In short, F.A. Johnson stated that a portion of its work was reassigned to other contractors on a basis that was not stated in the bid documents. They also alleged that because the County changed the contract’s inspection services consultant, the required inspections were not performed timely, causing delays. Consequently, F.A. Johnson alleges that its work crews and equipment sat idly in its yard, at a loss of $7,000.00 per diem. F.A. Johnson expected to receive the full contract value and instead received approximately $700,000.00 less. The County also retained approximately $13,000.00 of contract value that was earned by F.A. Johnson because F.A. Johnson would not sign a release of all claims. This retainage amount was earned by F.A. Johnson and will be paid as part of this resolution.

11A1 130271

RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING DISTRICT 11 PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT TRUST FUND; PROVIDING TERMS AND CONDITIONS FOR DISBURSEMENTS FROM THE TRUST FUND [SEE ORIGINAL ITEM UNDER FILE NO. 130173]

Notes The proposed resolution establishes District 11 Public Improvement Trust Fund (Trust Fund), providing terms and conditions for disbursements from the Trust Fund including the following:

The Trust Fund will be administered by the Department of Management and Budget, or its successor department, in accordance with this resolution.

The Trust Fund will be kept and maintained by the Finance Department in accordance with the County’s investment policies, and any deposits to the Trust Fund, including any interest earned thereon, will be used (a) in accordance with the terms and conditions of each grant or donation; or (b) if there are no specific terms or limitations attached to such grant or donation, at the direction of the commissioner for District 11 for the Public Improvement Projects provided such project serves a public purpose and is located in District 11.

The provisions of Administrative Order 1‐3, including those related to the acceptance or rejection of gifts on behalf of the County will apply to contributions to the Trust Fund.

Disbursements from the Trust Fund will be made in a duly approved resolution approved by the Board of County Commissioners (BCC).

All contracts funded in whole or in part by monies on deposit in the Trust Fund, including contracts for the purchase of construction services, professional services, materials, supplies, and goods and services, will be approved in accordance with the procedures set forth in federal, State or local law, as applicable.

This item differs from the original in that it provides that Administrative Order 1‐3 related to acceptance or rejection of gifts will apply, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) will administer the fund, and disbursements for the fund will be approved by resolution rather than motion approved by the BCC, and all contracts funded by the Trust Fund will be procured in accordance with all applicable laws. Additional Notes Notes from the March 12, 2012 Finance Committee Meeting The sponsoring commissioner sees this as a tool to better serve his district, in which there are no municipalities. This will create a mechanism in which additional funds will be available for capital improvement projects that have already been identified by the staff as a need and allow


Research Notes

16


the private sector to assist in funding of such projects. The departments of Parks, Recreation and Open Spaces and Animal Services have a similar component; however, there is no solicitation involved and they serve a Countywide need. According to the County Attorney, she is not aware of Ethics opining on this item.

11A2 130653

RESOLUTION URGING CONGRESS TO ENACT S. 394 AND H.R. 867 IN THEIR CURRENT FORM OR OTHER SIMILAR LEGISLATION WHICH WOULD PROHIBIT AND DETER THE THEFT OF METAL AND URGING THE FLORIDA LEGISLATURE TO ENACT CURRENT PROVISIONS OF S.B. 1434 AND H.B. 585 OR OTHER SIMILAR LEGISLATION WHICH WOULD LIMIT THE NUMBER OF LEAD‐ACID BATTERIES OR PARTS THEREOF THAT A SECONDARY METALS RECYCLER MAY PURCHASE IN CERTAIN TRANSACTIONS IN A SINGLE DAY

Notes The following resolution does the following:

Urges Congress to enact S. 394 and H.R. 867 in their current form or other similar legislation which would prohibit and deter the theft of metal;

Urges the Florida Legislature to enact S.B.1434 and H.B. 585 or other similar legislation which would limit the number of lead‐acid batteries or parts thereof that a secondary metals recycler may purchase in certain transactions in a single day;

Directs the Clerk of the Board to transmit a certified copy of this resolution to the Florida Congressional Delegation, Senator Amy Klobuchar of the U.S. Senate, Representative Erik Paulsen of the U.S. House of Representatives, the Governor, the Florida Senate President, the Florida House Speaker, the Chair, Members of the Miami‐Dade County State Legislative Delegation, Senator Greg Evers of the Florida Senate, and Representative Charles David Hood, Jr. of the Florida House of Representatives; and

Directs the County’s federal and state lobbyists to advocate for the legislation set forth in this resolution, and authorizes and directs the Office of Intergovernmental Affairs to amend the 2013 State Legislative Package and the 2013 Federal Legislative Package to include this item.

U.S. Senate Bill 394 (S. 394) and U.S. House of Representatives Bill 867 (H.R. 867) were filed for consideration during the 113th United States Congress by Senator Amy Klobuchar (D‐Minnesota) and Representative Erik Paulsen (R – Minnesota) respectively. S. 394 and H.R. 867 criminalize the theft of specified metal being used in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce where the theft harms critical infrastructure; and prohibit recycling agents from purchasing specified metal unless the seller provides documentation of ownership or other proof of authority to sell and there is a reasonable belief that such documentation or proof is valid, require recycling agents to keep purchase records, and prohibit certain cash transactions. Section 538.26, of the Florida Statutes deters metal theft by requiring secondary metals recyclers to obtain proof of ownership before purchasing items commonly obtained through theft, limiting hours of operations for secondary metals recyclers, and prohibiting secondary metals recyclers from purchasing from sellers who are minors, under the influence of alcohol, or are attempting to conceal their identity. S.B. 1434 and H.B. 585 would amend Section 538.26, Florida Statutes by limiting the number of lead‐acid batteries or parts thereof that a secondary metals recycler may purchase in certain transactions in a single day, thereby deterring the theft of lead‐acid batteries.

11A3 130616

RESOLUTION URGING COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO HOLD SUNSHINE MEETINGS WITH AFFECTED COMMISSIONERS PRIOR TO SPONSORING INCORPORATION OR ANNEXATION ITEMS THAT ENCOMPASS AREAS OF OTHER BOARD MEMBERS’ DISTRICTS AND TO EXCLUDE SUCH AREAS FROM ANY INCORPORATION OR ANNEXATION ITEMS

Notes The proposed resolution does the following:

Urges the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) Board members to hold sunshine meetings with affected Commissioners prior to sponsoring incorporation or annexation items that encompass areas outside the sponsoring Commissioner’s district; and

Encourages the sponsoring commissioner to exclude such areas from these items in the event that no agreement is reached at a sunshine meeting to include areas outside the sponsoring commissioner’s district in annexation or incorporation items.

Additional Notes On November 20, 2012, under Resolution No. 983‐12, the BCC created Annexation and Incorporation Task Force to review pending annexation and incorporation proposals and to make recommendations on how the county should proceed to address the remainder of the unincorporated communities.

16A1 130637

RESOLUTION APPROVING THE ERECTION, CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A HELIPAD AT JACKSON SOUTH COMMUNITY HOSPITAL LOCATED AT 9333 SW 152 STREET, IN COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 33‐303 OF THE CODE OF MIAMI‐DADE COUNTY(Regulatory and Economic Resources)

Notes The proposed resolution authorizes the erection, construction and operation of a helipad at Jackson South Community Hospital located at 9333 SW 152nd Street, in compliance with Section 33‐303 of the Code of Miami‐Dade County. This item was prepared by the Department of Regulatory and Economic Resources at the request of the Miami‐Dade County Public Health Trust and is recommended for approval. Fiscal Impact/Funding Source: The total budget for this project is estimated at $1,459,072.00 with funding from the Capital Contributions Budget Year 2013. Background On March 6, 2012, the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) through R‐248‐12 authorized the Public Health Trust to take actions necessary to extend trauma medicine services to Jackson South Community Hospital. In passing R‐248‐12, the BCC expressed a desire to establish and operate trauma care programs in south Miami‐Dade so as to better serve the community. The proposed helipad is a necessary and integral part of achieving the Resolution’s directive to establish a trauma center in south Miami‐Dade County. In order to be certified as a Level II Trauma Center, state law requires a helicopter landing site.


Research Notes

17


Project Description The project will consist of the construction of a 48’ x 48’ helipad above the hospital’s emergency room in conformance with the Department of Health’s Pamphlet 150‐9 transfer requirement. According to the applicant, the rooftop placement would set the helipad at a horizontal distance of more than 229 feet from the nearest neighboring residential property. The helipad’s placement on the rooftop of the building will also create an additional vertical distance from the nearest residential uses. Pursuant to p. 4 of the item, the projected development schedule is as follows: * Preconstruction Procurement Activities: October 25, 2012 through February 13, 2013 * Pre‐planning and Site Coordination: February 14, 2013 through March 30, 2013 * Shell and Exterior Activities: April 15, 2013 through May 14, 2013 * Interior Build‐Out Activities: May 14, 2013 through June 25, 2013 * Site Work Activities: May 28, 2013 through June 18, 2013

Is there a revised development schedule?

Public Hearing Requirement Section 33‐303 of the Code of Miami‐Dade County provides that, prior to the construction or operation of a government facility in the unincorporated areas of Miami‐Dade County, a favorable public hearing before the Board is required. The Board may only authorize the use, construction and operation of such facilities after considering, among other factors, the public need for the facility, the type of function involved, existing land use patterns in the area and the nature of the impact of the facility on surrounding properties. The attached report from the Miami‐Dade County Site Review Committee addresses these factors. Additional Notes The Miami‐Dade Fire Department (MDFR), as part of the Miami‐Dade County Site Review Committee, reviewed the application and provided the following comments:

MDFR has no objections to the proposed helipad. MDFR believes that the helipad will allow the hospital to extend its trauma patient service and operate more efficiently during the transfer and care of trauma patients.

ADD‐ON 130525

RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE ACCESS OF FLORIDA SHERIFF’S ASSOCIATION CONTRACT NO. 12‐20‐0905‐MD IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,287,584.00 TO PURCHASE MODEL YEAR 2013 POLICE PATROL VEHICLES, AUTHORIZING THE COUNTY MAYOR OR COUNTY MAYOR’S DESIGNEE TO ACCESS THE AGREEMENT FOR AND ON BEHALF OF MIAMI‐DADE COUNTY, AND TO EXERCISE ANY CANCELLATION AND RENEWAL PROVISIONS, AND TO EXERCISE ALL OTHER RIGHTS CONTAINED THEREIN

Notes The proposed resolution approves the contract award in the amount of $2,287,584 to Auto Nation Dodge of Pembroke Pines, Inc. for the purchase of 114 vehicles for the Miami‐Dade County Police Department (MDPD). The proposed resolution authorizes the County to access the Florida Sheriff’s Association (FSA) Contract 12‐20‐0905‐MD Utility Vehicles, Trucks, Vans and Other Fleet Equipment for this one‐time purchase. The deadline to place the order for these vehicles and to secure the favorable pricing offered under the FSA Contract is April 30, 2013. Therefore, this item is being waived onto this BCC agenda. Fiscal Impact The fiscal impact for the total one‐time purchase is $2,287,584. The funding source is the general fund.

Comparison of Proposed with Previous Contract

Previous Contract Proposed Contract

Contract No. and Title 11‐19‐0907‐MD Pursuit, Administrative Non‐Pursuit, Utility Vehicles, Trucks & Vans, and Other Fleet Equipment for one time purchase to access FSA Contract

12‐20‐0905‐MD Utility Vehicles, Trucks, Vans and Other Fleet Equipment for a one time purchase to access FSA Contract

Resolution No. and Award Date

April 17, 2012, under Reso. No. 348‐12 N/A

Contract Amount $2,645,000 $2,287,584

Number and Type of Vehicles

121 police patrol vehicles. All Dodge Chargers.

six (6) of the patrol vehicles were to be purchased and equipped with the manufacturer’s “Police Packages.”

114 police vehicles. 78 of which are 2013 Dodge Chargers and 36 are Dodge Avengers.

The Dodge Chargers are equipped with the manufacturers’ “Police Packages” which include special engines for high speed pursuits, upgraded suspensions, cooling systems, and other enhancements. The Dodge Avengers are mid‐sized, 4‐


Research Notes

18


cylinder sedans used for investigative purposes (non‐pursuit vehicles).

Funding Source Fleet Trust Fund General Fund

Awardee Autonation Dodge of Pembroke Pines, Inc. d/b/a Maroone Dodge of Pembroke Pines

Auto Nation Dodge of Pembroke Pines, Inc.

Questions / Comments At the April 17, 2012 award of the previous contract, a request was made to explore the use of Smart Cars at the Miami Seaport, the Miami‐Dade Aviation Department, and other areas not requiring chasing vehicles as a cost saving measure. What was the outcome of this request? Additional Notes A recent MDPD study, Table 1 below, shows the need to replace 1,945 high mileage vehicles over the next five years at an estimated cost of $47million. As of April 2013 the Department has no replacement for 112 vehicles which were retired due to age or damage. MDPD currently has an overall vehicle inventory of approximately 3,300 mixed vehicles (marked, unmarked, motorcycles, specialty and pool); 716 vehicles have well exceeded 100,000 odometer miles, and 350 vehicles, including 216 marked cars, have over 130,000 odometer miles. Over 50% of marked vehicles are seven‐years‐old or greater. This results in increased maintenance and repair costs, as well as an increased amount of time that vehicles are out of service. The Department projects that it will need to retire approximately 320 vehicles in FY 2012‐13. MDPD hopes to place an order for 177 vehicles in April 2013 which includes the request of 114 vehicles in the proposed item. The 177 vehicles should be delivered by September 2013; however at that point in time the Department projects it will then have a net loss, due to attrition, of 143 vehicles without replacement. MDPD’s proposed budget for FY 2013‐14 currently includes $9.6 million for replacement vehicles which will partially meet its projected requirements. However, requirements for future years beyond FY 2013‐14 are not yet funded. In FY 2003‐04 through FY 2006‐07 the Department replaced an average of 455 vehicles annually. In the wake of the County having to close a $200 million budget gap there were only two MDPD vehicles replaced in FY 2007‐08, and 87 vehicles, including 11 motorcycles, were replaced in the following bad economy of FY 2008‐09. This two‐year hiatus in vehicle purchases was followed by adding 347 vehicles in FY 2009‐10, but just one vehicle in FY 2010‐11; and 134 vehicles in FY 2011‐12. For the police, and other Miami‐Dade public safety organizations vehicles should be maintained in a serviceable condition at all times. Front line vehicles should always be in “pursuit ready” condition, so they can be deployed in an emergency situation. Given budget restrictions MDPD, in cooperation with Internal Services Department Fleet Maintenance, is creating new efficiencies in vehicle maintenance and repair to provide safe vehicles for all services entrusted to the Department.

TABLE 1

Replacement Cycle

Mixed FleetReplacement Qty

Funding Request (Vehicle & Safety Equip)

Year 1 (FY 12‐13) 177 Vehicles $3,632,969

Year 2 (FY 13‐14) 412 Vehicles $10,843,797

Year 3 (FY 14‐15) 440 Vehicles $10,829,525

Year 4 (FY 15‐16) 473 Vehicles $11,558,288

Year 5 (FY 16‐17) 443 Vehicles $10,774,862

Documents

Miami-Dade County Board of County Commissioners Office …Apr 16, 2013 · Concourse E Satellite is being serviced by a single three‐car Automated People Mover of questionable reliability